The continuing hunting of primates for "bush-meat" has always been suspected of possibily being the cause of HIV. Now, two new retroviruses have been discovered in Cameroon. One hopes that they will not have the same devastating impact that HIV has had.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
New AIDS-type virus in Africa
February 27, 2005
The Sun-Herald
Two new retroviruses never before seen in humans have turned up among people who regularly hunt monkeys in Cameroon, researchers say.
As with AIDS, these viruses insert their genetic material directly into cells and perhaps even into a person's or animal's chromosomes.
Closely related versions of the viruses cause leukaemia and inflammatory and neurological diseases.
Researchers at Johns Hopkins University plan to focus on Central Africa.
Sunday, February 27, 2005
Saturday, February 26, 2005
Population growth will be in the developing world
UN population projections 
The world population will continue to rise with most of the growth occuring in developing nations. The UN Population Division has estimated a population in 2050 of 9.1 billion!
If population projections are correct, then India will overtake China has the most populous country by 2030.
From: BBC News
World population 'to rise by 40%' (excerpt)
...The world's population is expected to rise from the current 6.5 billion to 9.1 billion by 2050, the UN says.
Virtually all the growth will be in the developing world, according to a report by the UN Population Division.
By contrast, the population of developed countries will remain almost static at 1.2 billion, the report adds.
It says India will overtake China as the world's most populous country by 2030 - five years earlier than previously expected...
...The new report predicts that the population in the world's 50 poorest countries will more than double by 2050.
It says that nations such as Afghanistan, Chad and East Timor will see their numbers going up three-fold...
...The report also says that Africa - unlike other regions - has seen average life expectancy at birth decline from 62 years in 1995 to 48 years in 2000-2005.
It attributes the sharp fall to the continuing spread of HIV/Aids and other infectious diseases, as well as armed conflicts and economic stagnation...
Friday, February 25, 2005
Political delusions in HIV/AIDs
HIV/AIDs is a serious problem in sub-Sahara Africa. There are places where up to 1 in 4 adults are HIV positive! Unfortunately, this will lead to a massive drop in the economically productive part of the population in years to come.
There is abundant evidence that in the fight against HIV/AIDs, condoms are effective. Furthermore, we known that programs based on the idea of abstinence are not-effective. The main pressure, of course, comes from the US religious-right. In my humble opinion, their efforts to withdraw funding into UN programs that help provide condoms to these people is morally bankrupt.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Condoms biggest gun in the AIDS battle, study finds (excerpt)
By Maggie Fox in Washington
February 25, 2005
...Programs that promote abstinence and monogamy to combat AIDS in Uganda are failing, and only condom use has kept the deadly virus in check, researchers report.
Their study, presented to a meeting of AIDS researchers on Wednesday, suggests that Uganda's much-lauded success in battling a virus that has devastated Africa has little to do with programs pushed the hardest by the Bush Administration.
"We think it is condoms keeping the rate from going up," Maria Wawer of Columbia University in New York, who helped lead the study, said. Her team, which includes experts at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Uganda's Makerere University and other local officials, has for 10 years followed 10,000 adults in the Rakai district of Uganda, or about 85 per cent of the population in 44 villages...
...In Uganda, officials fighting the advance of the HIV virus embraced the "A, B, C" approach that represents abstinence, being faithful to one partner and using condoms.
While sub-Saharan Africa has 90 per cent of the world's 39 million HIV-infected people, with numbers growing steadily, Uganda's AIDS rate has fallen.
In Rakai the rate has dropped by 30 per cent. But among all age groups and in both sexes, only condom use has increased, Dr Wawer told the 12th Annual Retrovirus Conference
The researchers' results emerged as Britain's International Development Minister, Gareth Thomas, prepared to appeal to the European Union to use its influence to have a shortfall of condoms in Africa discussed at the summit on the UN's millennium development goals in September.
In Africa only four condoms a year are available for every man between 15 and 59 years old.
The shortage is partly due to a lack of funding for the United Nations Population Fund, which has had its income slashed by the Bush Administration. The American right has lobbied strongly and successfully against giving money to agencies that support family planning clinics offering advice on abortion...
There is abundant evidence that in the fight against HIV/AIDs, condoms are effective. Furthermore, we known that programs based on the idea of abstinence are not-effective. The main pressure, of course, comes from the US religious-right. In my humble opinion, their efforts to withdraw funding into UN programs that help provide condoms to these people is morally bankrupt.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Condoms biggest gun in the AIDS battle, study finds (excerpt)
By Maggie Fox in Washington
February 25, 2005
...Programs that promote abstinence and monogamy to combat AIDS in Uganda are failing, and only condom use has kept the deadly virus in check, researchers report.
Their study, presented to a meeting of AIDS researchers on Wednesday, suggests that Uganda's much-lauded success in battling a virus that has devastated Africa has little to do with programs pushed the hardest by the Bush Administration.
"We think it is condoms keeping the rate from going up," Maria Wawer of Columbia University in New York, who helped lead the study, said. Her team, which includes experts at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Uganda's Makerere University and other local officials, has for 10 years followed 10,000 adults in the Rakai district of Uganda, or about 85 per cent of the population in 44 villages...
...In Uganda, officials fighting the advance of the HIV virus embraced the "A, B, C" approach that represents abstinence, being faithful to one partner and using condoms.
While sub-Saharan Africa has 90 per cent of the world's 39 million HIV-infected people, with numbers growing steadily, Uganda's AIDS rate has fallen.
In Rakai the rate has dropped by 30 per cent. But among all age groups and in both sexes, only condom use has increased, Dr Wawer told the 12th Annual Retrovirus Conference
The researchers' results emerged as Britain's International Development Minister, Gareth Thomas, prepared to appeal to the European Union to use its influence to have a shortfall of condoms in Africa discussed at the summit on the UN's millennium development goals in September.
In Africa only four condoms a year are available for every man between 15 and 59 years old.
The shortage is partly due to a lack of funding for the United Nations Population Fund, which has had its income slashed by the Bush Administration. The American right has lobbied strongly and successfully against giving money to agencies that support family planning clinics offering advice on abortion...
Thursday, February 24, 2005
Antidepressants and suicide risk
There has been a lot of talk in the mass media about the increased risk of suicide in patients with depression on a selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor (SSRI). The BMJ has published in the current edition three separate studies looking a SSRIs and the increased risk of suicide, compared to placebo as well as older antidepressants like tricyclic antidepressants (TCA).
A quick run down of the results:
E-mail me if you want the PDF of the full editorial.
A quick run down of the results:
- When compared to placebo (and non-pharmocologic treatment of depression), SSRIs increase the risk of fatal and non-fatal (combined) suicide attempts by about twofold.
- There is, however, no statistically significant increase in risk in fatal suicide attempts between SSRIs and placebo.
- There is no significant difference between SSRIs and TCAs for overall increase risk of suicide attempts.
- Weak evidence of increased risk of non-fatal self-harm with SSRIs compared to TCAs in patients under 18 years of age.
E-mail me if you want the PDF of the full editorial.
Synthetic tooth enamel cures dental cavities
Recently published in Nature, were the results from a Japanese team. Using a fine paste of synthetic tooth enamel material, small dental cavities were repaired in just 15 minutes! Normally, filling material cannot bond to small cavities which is why the dentists needs to drill the whole to a larger size.
From: New Scientist
Synthetic enamel offers painless fillings
Dentists, put away your drills. Synthetic tooth enamel can seal tiny cavities without the pain, and with less damage to the patient's teeth.
Cavities form when acid produced by mouth bacteria starts eating away at the tooth's protective enamel layer. Early on, these lesions are too small for fillers such as resins to stick properly, so dentists have to drill bigger holes that destroy some healthy parts of the tooth.
Now Kazue Yamagishi's team at the FAP Dental Institute in Tokyo has found that a fine paste of hydroxyapatite crystals, the material of which natural enamel is made, can repair small cavities in just 15 minutes. The paste fills cavities with long crystals that bond with the tooth's own structure. But using it needs care. The strongly acidic mix required to promote crystal growth would be painful if it touched the gums.
Journal reference: Nature (vol 433 p 819)
From: New Scientist
Synthetic enamel offers painless fillings
Dentists, put away your drills. Synthetic tooth enamel can seal tiny cavities without the pain, and with less damage to the patient's teeth.
Cavities form when acid produced by mouth bacteria starts eating away at the tooth's protective enamel layer. Early on, these lesions are too small for fillers such as resins to stick properly, so dentists have to drill bigger holes that destroy some healthy parts of the tooth.
Now Kazue Yamagishi's team at the FAP Dental Institute in Tokyo has found that a fine paste of hydroxyapatite crystals, the material of which natural enamel is made, can repair small cavities in just 15 minutes. The paste fills cavities with long crystals that bond with the tooth's own structure. But using it needs care. The strongly acidic mix required to promote crystal growth would be painful if it touched the gums.
Journal reference: Nature (vol 433 p 819)
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
Cannabinoids and Alzheimer's disease
A Spanish study recently published in the Journal of Neuroscience seems to show that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of Alzheimer's disease. The rat model they used seemed to deliver promising results (for the rats) and the concept is at least biologically plausible.
It is highly unlikely that straight out cannabis or THC will be an acceptable form of treatment considering its harmful side-effects. However, the authors suggest that by targeting a particular receptor subtype (CR2) that the more "harmful" effects may be negated.
It will be interesting to see how this research pans out. It may well be that drugs that act on cannabinoid receptors may become the "next big thing" IF they are effective for Alzheimer's disease.
From: BBC News
Marijuana may block Alzheimer's (excerpt)
...The research, by Madrid's Complutense University and the Cajal Institute, is published in the Journal of Neuroscience...
...The scientists first compared the brain tissue of patients who died from Alzheimer's disease with that of healthy people who had died at a similar age.
They looked closely at brain cell receptors to which cannabinoids bind, allowing their effects to be felt.
They also studied structures called microglia, which activate the brain's immune response.
Microglia collect near the plaque deposits associated with Alzheimer's disease and, when active, cause inflammation.
The researchers found a dramatically reduced functioning of cannabinoid receptors in diseased brain tissue.
This was an indication that patients had lost the capacity to experience cannabinoids' protective effects.
The next step was to test the effect of cannabinoids on rats injected with the amyloid protein that forms Alzheimer's plaques.
Those animals who were also given a dose of a cannabinoid performed much better in tests of their mental functioning.
The researchers found that the presence of amyloid protein in the rats' brains activated immune cells.
However, rats that also received the cannabinoid showed no sign of microglia activation...
...Researcher Dr Maria de Ceballos said: "These findings that cannabinoids work both to prevent inflammation and to protect the brain may set the stage for their use as a therapeutic approach for Alzheimer's disease..."
...Harriet Millward, of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said there were two main types of cannabinoid receptor, CR1 and CR2.
"It is CR1 that produces most of the effects of marijuana, including the harmful ones.
"If it is possible to make drugs that act only on CR2, as suggested by the authors of this study, they might mimic the positive effects of cannabinoids without the damaging ones of marijuana...
..."There is also no evidence yet that cannabinoid-based drugs can slow the decline in human Alzheimer's patients..."
It is highly unlikely that straight out cannabis or THC will be an acceptable form of treatment considering its harmful side-effects. However, the authors suggest that by targeting a particular receptor subtype (CR2) that the more "harmful" effects may be negated.
It will be interesting to see how this research pans out. It may well be that drugs that act on cannabinoid receptors may become the "next big thing" IF they are effective for Alzheimer's disease.
From: BBC News
Marijuana may block Alzheimer's (excerpt)
...The research, by Madrid's Complutense University and the Cajal Institute, is published in the Journal of Neuroscience...
...The scientists first compared the brain tissue of patients who died from Alzheimer's disease with that of healthy people who had died at a similar age.
They looked closely at brain cell receptors to which cannabinoids bind, allowing their effects to be felt.
They also studied structures called microglia, which activate the brain's immune response.
Microglia collect near the plaque deposits associated with Alzheimer's disease and, when active, cause inflammation.
The researchers found a dramatically reduced functioning of cannabinoid receptors in diseased brain tissue.
This was an indication that patients had lost the capacity to experience cannabinoids' protective effects.
The next step was to test the effect of cannabinoids on rats injected with the amyloid protein that forms Alzheimer's plaques.
Those animals who were also given a dose of a cannabinoid performed much better in tests of their mental functioning.
The researchers found that the presence of amyloid protein in the rats' brains activated immune cells.
However, rats that also received the cannabinoid showed no sign of microglia activation...
...Researcher Dr Maria de Ceballos said: "These findings that cannabinoids work both to prevent inflammation and to protect the brain may set the stage for their use as a therapeutic approach for Alzheimer's disease..."
...Harriet Millward, of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said there were two main types of cannabinoid receptor, CR1 and CR2.
"It is CR1 that produces most of the effects of marijuana, including the harmful ones.
"If it is possible to make drugs that act only on CR2, as suggested by the authors of this study, they might mimic the positive effects of cannabinoids without the damaging ones of marijuana...
..."There is also no evidence yet that cannabinoid-based drugs can slow the decline in human Alzheimer's patients..."
Monday, February 21, 2005
Vegan diets dangerous for children
Though it is hardly surprising considering that the developing child's requirements for micronutrients are much higher than in adults, someone has finally shown clearly that vegan diets in kids is (i) dangerous, and (ii) giving a small supplement of meat in the diet makes a huge difference.
Vegans for those who don't know, are those people who don't eat any animal products at all (i.e., including milk, cheese, eggs). Frankly, I think these people are just damn strange. There is a certain degree of "harmony", I suppose, in being a vegetarian, but what is the logic in eating no animal products at all?
Of course the vegans put up their usually flawed arguments. Is it really so hard to understand that the nutritional needs of children are vastly different from adults?
From: BBC News
Children 'harmed' by vegan diets (excerpt)
By Michelle Roberts
BBC News health reporter, in Washington DC
...Lindsay Allen, of the US Agricultural Research Service, attacked parents who insisted their children lived by the maxim "meat is murder".
Animal source foods have some nutrients not found anywhere else, she told a Washington science conference.
The Vegan Society dismissed the claims, saying its research showed vegans were often healthier than meat eaters...
..Professor Allen said: "There have been sufficient studies clearly showing that when women avoid all animal foods, their babies are born small, they grow very slowly and they are developmentally retarded, possibly permanently."
She was especially critical of parents who imposed a vegan lifestyle on their children, which denied them milk, cheese, butter and meat.
"There's absolutely no question that it's unethical for parents to bring up their children as strict vegans," she said at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting...
...Research she carried out among African schoolchildren suggests as little as two spoonfuls of meat each day is enough to provide nutrients such as vitamin B12, zinc and iron.
The 544 children studied had been raised on diets chiefly consisting of starchy, low-nutrition corn and bean staples lacking these micronutrients.
Over two years, some of the children were given 2oz supplements of meat each day, equivalent to about two spoonfuls of mince.
Two other groups received either a cup of milk a day or an oil supplement containing the same amount of energy. The diet of a fourth group was left unaltered.
The changes seen in the children given the meat, and to a lesser extent the milk or oil, were dramatic.
These children grew more and performed better on problem-solving and intelligence tests than any of the other children at the end of the two years.
They also became more active, talkative and playful at school.
Adding either meat or milk to the diets also almost completely eliminated the very high rates of vitamin B12 deficiency previously seen in the children...
...Professor Allen stressed that although the study was conducted in a poor African community, its message was highly relevant to people in developed countries...
Vegans for those who don't know, are those people who don't eat any animal products at all (i.e., including milk, cheese, eggs). Frankly, I think these people are just damn strange. There is a certain degree of "harmony", I suppose, in being a vegetarian, but what is the logic in eating no animal products at all?
Of course the vegans put up their usually flawed arguments. Is it really so hard to understand that the nutritional needs of children are vastly different from adults?
From: BBC News
Children 'harmed' by vegan diets (excerpt)
By Michelle Roberts
BBC News health reporter, in Washington DC
...Lindsay Allen, of the US Agricultural Research Service, attacked parents who insisted their children lived by the maxim "meat is murder".
Animal source foods have some nutrients not found anywhere else, she told a Washington science conference.
The Vegan Society dismissed the claims, saying its research showed vegans were often healthier than meat eaters...
..Professor Allen said: "There have been sufficient studies clearly showing that when women avoid all animal foods, their babies are born small, they grow very slowly and they are developmentally retarded, possibly permanently."
She was especially critical of parents who imposed a vegan lifestyle on their children, which denied them milk, cheese, butter and meat.
"There's absolutely no question that it's unethical for parents to bring up their children as strict vegans," she said at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting...
...Research she carried out among African schoolchildren suggests as little as two spoonfuls of meat each day is enough to provide nutrients such as vitamin B12, zinc and iron.
The 544 children studied had been raised on diets chiefly consisting of starchy, low-nutrition corn and bean staples lacking these micronutrients.
Over two years, some of the children were given 2oz supplements of meat each day, equivalent to about two spoonfuls of mince.
Two other groups received either a cup of milk a day or an oil supplement containing the same amount of energy. The diet of a fourth group was left unaltered.
The changes seen in the children given the meat, and to a lesser extent the milk or oil, were dramatic.
These children grew more and performed better on problem-solving and intelligence tests than any of the other children at the end of the two years.
They also became more active, talkative and playful at school.
Adding either meat or milk to the diets also almost completely eliminated the very high rates of vitamin B12 deficiency previously seen in the children...
...Professor Allen stressed that although the study was conducted in a poor African community, its message was highly relevant to people in developed countries...
Sunday, February 20, 2005
Best online music download service
Although Apple's iTunes service is probably the most successful online music download service, no doubt fuelled by the popularity of the iPod, there are many problems facing the user.
First and foremost, Apple's proprietary format and DRM means that such files are not playable on any player other than the iPod. This is a highly risky undertaking.
Secondly, the iTunes service isn't even available in Australia!
I have just recently trialled the Russian site allofmp3.com. And, I am very very impressed.
Remarkably, downloads are priced according to bandwidth. That is, the larger the file you download, the more the cost. You can also CHOOSE which format you wish the music track to be encoded in... MP3, WMA, OGG, and for some tracks, even a lossless encoding scheme! All without the limitations of a restrictive DRM.
For an average MP3 file (I prefer LAME alt-preset standard which gives essentially indistinguishable quality from CD-DA at an average bitrate of around 192 kbit/s), this means approximately $US 0.10 per track! Fantastic! For the cost of one track on iTunes, I can download a whole album.
Furthermore, by downloading allofmp3's desktop client, you can download, browse and search for music tracks quickly and easily. Even better, it has a "preview" option for every track so you can actually listen to make sure you are getting the right music, not to mention, to see if you like it.
Obviously, there is a question of the legality. However, allofmp3.com has been around for several years and a quick search of the net reveals equally high praise from many other commentators. Some have performed a review of the legality and it appears that this is a loophole in the Russian copyright act. Needless to say, this service is completely legal in Russia. I would say that the use of this service falls within a grey area for non-Russian users. However, assuming that it is legal to buy a CD (legal, not pirated) from another country (e.g., while on a trip) and then to bring it back home, this service is by de facto legal too. I would be similar to an Australian user using the US iTunes service (which is possible though not straightforward).
The rest of the world should take notice. This Russian model actually excites me to go look at new music and buy it... an enthusiasm which I have long lost on the traditional CD model.
First and foremost, Apple's proprietary format and DRM means that such files are not playable on any player other than the iPod. This is a highly risky undertaking.
Secondly, the iTunes service isn't even available in Australia!
I have just recently trialled the Russian site allofmp3.com. And, I am very very impressed.
Remarkably, downloads are priced according to bandwidth. That is, the larger the file you download, the more the cost. You can also CHOOSE which format you wish the music track to be encoded in... MP3, WMA, OGG, and for some tracks, even a lossless encoding scheme! All without the limitations of a restrictive DRM.
For an average MP3 file (I prefer LAME alt-preset standard which gives essentially indistinguishable quality from CD-DA at an average bitrate of around 192 kbit/s), this means approximately $US 0.10 per track! Fantastic! For the cost of one track on iTunes, I can download a whole album.
Furthermore, by downloading allofmp3's desktop client, you can download, browse and search for music tracks quickly and easily. Even better, it has a "preview" option for every track so you can actually listen to make sure you are getting the right music, not to mention, to see if you like it.
Obviously, there is a question of the legality. However, allofmp3.com has been around for several years and a quick search of the net reveals equally high praise from many other commentators. Some have performed a review of the legality and it appears that this is a loophole in the Russian copyright act. Needless to say, this service is completely legal in Russia. I would say that the use of this service falls within a grey area for non-Russian users. However, assuming that it is legal to buy a CD (legal, not pirated) from another country (e.g., while on a trip) and then to bring it back home, this service is by de facto legal too. I would be similar to an Australian user using the US iTunes service (which is possible though not straightforward).
The rest of the world should take notice. This Russian model actually excites me to go look at new music and buy it... an enthusiasm which I have long lost on the traditional CD model.
Saturday, February 19, 2005
Senator Hill the dictionary basher
This week, the sorry saga of Senator Hill continues as he resorts to one of the last sad refuges one can go in an arguement or debate. Playing semantics.
It seems pretty obvious that Rod Barton knows what he is talking about and any reasonably minded person will agree, that yes, he did perform interrogations in Iraq.
And frankly, what is the big deal with that admission?
Of course, to admit that would mean that Senator Hill would have to admit that the Government's precious position that "no Australian was involved in interrogations" is erroneous; not that we are really fooled that Senator Hill was simply lying to Parliament.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
The ugly semantics of interrogation (excerpt)
February 19, 2005
...There are lies, damned lies and statistics - and then there are semantics. The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, has been playing the semantics game for all it's worth in parrying Labor questions about the role of Australians in questioning prisoners in Iraq. Last June 16, after publication of graphic pictures of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, Senator Hill told Parliament that no Australians had been involved in the "interrogation" of Iraqi prisoners. On Monday, that statement was strongly challenged in an ABC Four Corners program. Since then Senator Hill has resorted to a defence by definition, drawing an artful distinction between "interrogation", on one side, and "interview" or "debriefing" on the other.
To recapitulate. Rod Barton, an Australian with impressive credentials as an intelligence officer and as a senior weapons inspector in Iraq, told the ABC that he and other Australians had taken part in interrogations at Camp Cropper, where the Americans held "high value" Iraqis thought to know about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. In a written response to an official questionnaire, he said he had voiced concerns to Australian officials in March last year about possible abuse of detainees and had recommended that Australians not be involved in the interview process. He was particularly worried that one detainee may have been beaten to death. No mention of any of this in Senator Hill's June statement.
On Wednesday, the senator, flanked by top brass, fronted up to a Senate committee. Well, yes, officials conceded, up to eight Australians were involved in questioning Iraqi prisoners. Dr Barton's concerns about prisoner abuse were passed on to the US and an American investigator subsequently interviewed him. But interviews in which Australians took part were not "interrogations", Senator Hill insisted, they were "debriefs" involving compliant, willing detainees - a description that sits oddly with Dr Barton's account of questioning a prisoner in an orange jump suit accompanied by an armed guard. The Hill definition of interrogation - narrower than those in most dictionaries - is "a hostile, aggressive and systematic method of information-gathering where various techniques are utilised". This is military-speak. Perhaps, given those sick images from Abu Ghraib, there could also be an alternative definition of "debrief" - an interview involving removal of a prisoner's underpants.
Semantics aside, this is another example of the Government's refusal from the start to be straight about the Iraq venture. It was typical of its bad habit of trying to discredit whistleblowers rather than address the issue that Senator Hill suggested this week that, if Dr Barton did take part in an interrogation, he was acting against orders. On any fair viewing of his television performance, Dr Barton seems to have acted quite properly in a difficult situation, reporting his concerns to his superiors. Only now, frustrated at official prevarications, has he gone public...
It seems pretty obvious that Rod Barton knows what he is talking about and any reasonably minded person will agree, that yes, he did perform interrogations in Iraq.
And frankly, what is the big deal with that admission?
Of course, to admit that would mean that Senator Hill would have to admit that the Government's precious position that "no Australian was involved in interrogations" is erroneous; not that we are really fooled that Senator Hill was simply lying to Parliament.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
The ugly semantics of interrogation (excerpt)
February 19, 2005
...There are lies, damned lies and statistics - and then there are semantics. The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, has been playing the semantics game for all it's worth in parrying Labor questions about the role of Australians in questioning prisoners in Iraq. Last June 16, after publication of graphic pictures of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, Senator Hill told Parliament that no Australians had been involved in the "interrogation" of Iraqi prisoners. On Monday, that statement was strongly challenged in an ABC Four Corners program. Since then Senator Hill has resorted to a defence by definition, drawing an artful distinction between "interrogation", on one side, and "interview" or "debriefing" on the other.
To recapitulate. Rod Barton, an Australian with impressive credentials as an intelligence officer and as a senior weapons inspector in Iraq, told the ABC that he and other Australians had taken part in interrogations at Camp Cropper, where the Americans held "high value" Iraqis thought to know about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. In a written response to an official questionnaire, he said he had voiced concerns to Australian officials in March last year about possible abuse of detainees and had recommended that Australians not be involved in the interview process. He was particularly worried that one detainee may have been beaten to death. No mention of any of this in Senator Hill's June statement.
On Wednesday, the senator, flanked by top brass, fronted up to a Senate committee. Well, yes, officials conceded, up to eight Australians were involved in questioning Iraqi prisoners. Dr Barton's concerns about prisoner abuse were passed on to the US and an American investigator subsequently interviewed him. But interviews in which Australians took part were not "interrogations", Senator Hill insisted, they were "debriefs" involving compliant, willing detainees - a description that sits oddly with Dr Barton's account of questioning a prisoner in an orange jump suit accompanied by an armed guard. The Hill definition of interrogation - narrower than those in most dictionaries - is "a hostile, aggressive and systematic method of information-gathering where various techniques are utilised". This is military-speak. Perhaps, given those sick images from Abu Ghraib, there could also be an alternative definition of "debrief" - an interview involving removal of a prisoner's underpants.
Semantics aside, this is another example of the Government's refusal from the start to be straight about the Iraq venture. It was typical of its bad habit of trying to discredit whistleblowers rather than address the issue that Senator Hill suggested this week that, if Dr Barton did take part in an interrogation, he was acting against orders. On any fair viewing of his television performance, Dr Barton seems to have acted quite properly in a difficult situation, reporting his concerns to his superiors. Only now, frustrated at official prevarications, has he gone public...
Friday, February 18, 2005
Quetiapine in dementia
The two most commonly used atypical antipsychotic drugs used to treat aggitation in patients with dementia (risperidone and olanzepine) have both been linked with an increased risk of stroke.
Quetiapine (also an atypical antipsychotic) is also a particularly useful drug in this setting too. I have always felt though, it was only going to be a matter of time before someone found the same adverse effects with quetiapine as with the other two agents.
Recently, a small trial looking at the progression of cognitive decline in patients with Alzheimer's disease, comparing placebo, rivastigmine and quetiapine seemed to indicate that quetiapine signficantly accelerated the cognitive decline. Although the trial is small, I think that the writing's on the wall.
From: BBC News
Concerns over Alzheimer's drug (excerpt)
...Quetiapine (Seroquel) is commonly used in nursing homes to combat agitation, a common symptom of Alzheimer's.
But research by Institute of Psychiatry experts in the British Medical Journal online suggests it could significantly speed up the rate of patients' decline...
...These results show the huge and pressing need to develop new and safe treatments for people with dementia.
Rebecca Wood, Alzheimer's Research Trust
Antipsychotic drugs such as quetiapine are used in up to 45% of nursing homes to treat agitation, which is a common and distressing symptom of dementia. They are also used to treat schizophrenia.
Ninety-three patients at care homes in the north-east of England who had Alzheimer's, dementia and significant levels of agitation were studied over six months.
They were split into three groups. One was given a daily dose of quetiapine, another was given the "anti-dementia" drug rivastigmine, and the third a dummy pill.
Researchers then assessed their agitation levels and cognitive abilities, such as memory skills, throughout the study...
...Forty-six patients completed cognitive assessments after six weeks.
The 14 who were taking quetiapine registered an average drop of around 14 points on the scale used to assess decline, compared to almost no change for those taking the dummy pill.
Those who took rivastigmine showed little or no worsening of their illness - but no improvement in symptoms compared to the dummy pill group.
The study is of concern to Alzheimer's researchers as there have previously been worries about the safety of the two most commonly used antipsychotic drugs in people with dementia, risperidone and olanzapine, because of an increased risk of stroke.
But the researchers said their findings showed quetiapine should not be used instead of other drugs for alleviating their symptoms, and that they highlighted concerns over long term use of antipsychotics in Alzheimer's patients.
Dr Clive Ballard, who led the study, said: "Behavioural problems seen in people with dementia can be extremely distressing and present major difficulties for both patients and caregivers.
"This research shows that the drug quetiapine does not help with the agitation experienced by some patients and that it accelerates cognitive decline..."
Quetiapine (also an atypical antipsychotic) is also a particularly useful drug in this setting too. I have always felt though, it was only going to be a matter of time before someone found the same adverse effects with quetiapine as with the other two agents.
Recently, a small trial looking at the progression of cognitive decline in patients with Alzheimer's disease, comparing placebo, rivastigmine and quetiapine seemed to indicate that quetiapine signficantly accelerated the cognitive decline. Although the trial is small, I think that the writing's on the wall.
From: BBC News
Concerns over Alzheimer's drug (excerpt)
...Quetiapine (Seroquel) is commonly used in nursing homes to combat agitation, a common symptom of Alzheimer's.
But research by Institute of Psychiatry experts in the British Medical Journal online suggests it could significantly speed up the rate of patients' decline...
...These results show the huge and pressing need to develop new and safe treatments for people with dementia.
Rebecca Wood, Alzheimer's Research Trust
Antipsychotic drugs such as quetiapine are used in up to 45% of nursing homes to treat agitation, which is a common and distressing symptom of dementia. They are also used to treat schizophrenia.
Ninety-three patients at care homes in the north-east of England who had Alzheimer's, dementia and significant levels of agitation were studied over six months.
They were split into three groups. One was given a daily dose of quetiapine, another was given the "anti-dementia" drug rivastigmine, and the third a dummy pill.
Researchers then assessed their agitation levels and cognitive abilities, such as memory skills, throughout the study...
...Forty-six patients completed cognitive assessments after six weeks.
The 14 who were taking quetiapine registered an average drop of around 14 points on the scale used to assess decline, compared to almost no change for those taking the dummy pill.
Those who took rivastigmine showed little or no worsening of their illness - but no improvement in symptoms compared to the dummy pill group.
The study is of concern to Alzheimer's researchers as there have previously been worries about the safety of the two most commonly used antipsychotic drugs in people with dementia, risperidone and olanzapine, because of an increased risk of stroke.
But the researchers said their findings showed quetiapine should not be used instead of other drugs for alleviating their symptoms, and that they highlighted concerns over long term use of antipsychotics in Alzheimer's patients.
Dr Clive Ballard, who led the study, said: "Behavioural problems seen in people with dementia can be extremely distressing and present major difficulties for both patients and caregivers.
"This research shows that the drug quetiapine does not help with the agitation experienced by some patients and that it accelerates cognitive decline..."
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Hicks trial a travesty of justice
Mr Habib has been released, but the other Australian in Guantanamo Bay David Hicks is still going through the military commissions. If the US does have something substantial against Mr Hicks, then he should be given a fair trial under due process rather than this kangaroo court of illigitimacy.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Amnesty attacks Hicks trial as sham justice (excerpt)
By Cynthia Banham, Defence Reporter
February 15, 2005
...Jumana Musa, Amnesty International's legal observer at the Guantanamo Bay military commissions, says the US trial that will hear the case of David Hicks is like an operation where the surgeons have had no training in basic human anatomy.
Ms Musa is visiting Australia to talk to the federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, about the commissions.
She will tell him today that the commissions - set up by the US outside the confines of either its domestic legal system or the Geneva conventions - is "a broken process ... [it] isn't working, and hasn't been working"...
...Why did Ms Musa bother coming this far?
Because Australia, she says, is "the only country that seems to have come out and said that the idea of trying somebody, their own citizen, before this process might be OK, and I think that should be a concern to anybody".
She says the British Government refused to let its citizens be subjected to the military commissions unless they met "some kind of basic fair trial standard".
"The fact that all the British detainees have now gone home without being charged, without being brought before these commissions, makes it clear that the commissions were never brought in line with any type of fair trial standards that would satisfy the British," she said.
"If that's the case, they shouldn't satisfy anybody..."
"...the commissions - set up by the US outside the confines of either its domestic legal system or the Geneva conventions - is 'a broken process ... [it] isn't working, and hasn't been working'..." (Jumana Musa)
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Amnesty attacks Hicks trial as sham justice (excerpt)
By Cynthia Banham, Defence Reporter
February 15, 2005
...Jumana Musa, Amnesty International's legal observer at the Guantanamo Bay military commissions, says the US trial that will hear the case of David Hicks is like an operation where the surgeons have had no training in basic human anatomy.
Ms Musa is visiting Australia to talk to the federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, about the commissions.
She will tell him today that the commissions - set up by the US outside the confines of either its domestic legal system or the Geneva conventions - is "a broken process ... [it] isn't working, and hasn't been working"...
...Why did Ms Musa bother coming this far?
Because Australia, she says, is "the only country that seems to have come out and said that the idea of trying somebody, their own citizen, before this process might be OK, and I think that should be a concern to anybody".
She says the British Government refused to let its citizens be subjected to the military commissions unless they met "some kind of basic fair trial standard".
"The fact that all the British detainees have now gone home without being charged, without being brought before these commissions, makes it clear that the commissions were never brought in line with any type of fair trial standards that would satisfy the British," she said.
"If that's the case, they shouldn't satisfy anybody..."
Monday, February 14, 2005
Culture of deceit in the Howard Government
One has to admit that the Howard Government is very successful. It has returned to power again and again with apparently more support from the Australian public than ever. To characterise Australia's foreign/security/border protection policies, one will have to say it is "very clever".
Howard knows how to manipulate the truth and the Australian public like a master puppeteer and the Australian Labour Party has been simply ineffectual in countering it.
For example, Senator Hill (Defence Minister) has claimed in parliament that there were no Australians involved in interrogation of Iraqi prisoners. That is patently untrue as has been revealed by former Defence Intellegence Organisation specialist Rod Barton (he personally conducted interrogations).
His attempt to tell the truth (which isn't all that remarkable when you get down to it) has been met with stonewalling from the Department of Defence. All the while, Senator Hill has been dodging the issue and sweeping it under the carpet. Frankly, this is a reiteration of the Tampa incident and should be exposed for what it is... government white lies to manipulate the Australian public.
Kim Beazley (opposition leader) is a man of great heart but now is the time for some backbone.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Hill lied about Iraq interrogations: expert (excerpt) By Tom Allard February 14, 2005
...The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, lied to Parliament when he said no Australians had interrogated Iraqi prisoners, an Australian biological weapons expert says.
Rod Barton, a former Defence Intelligence Organisation specialist, has also painted a picture of a servile Australian, US and British military hierarchy, prepared to suppress the truth to protect their political masters.
Mr Barton says he interrogated prisoners at Camp Cropper, near Baghdad airport, when contracted to work for the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) and told the Defence Department when he returned in March last year.
Yet two months later, Senator Hill told Parliament: "Defence has thoroughly reviewed the information and has confirmed the key facts in this issue. Australia did not interrogate prisoners."
That statement was made to correct earlier false remarks by Senator Hill to the Senate about when Australians became aware of the prisoner abuse scandal, exposed in a series of Herald reports.
But Mr Barton says Senator Hill followed a falsehood with more lies.
"I immediately phoned up the department and reported that I was annoyed," Mr Barton said.
He said the Defence Department responded by saying he had conducted "interviews", not interrogations.
"Someone was brought to me in an orange jumpsuit with a guard with a gun standing behind him," Mr Barton said. "I believe it was an interrogation. The Iraqis regarded it as an interrogation," he said.
Moreover, he says he has since learnt that other Australians were involved in interrogations in Iraq...
Howard knows how to manipulate the truth and the Australian public like a master puppeteer and the Australian Labour Party has been simply ineffectual in countering it.
For example, Senator Hill (Defence Minister) has claimed in parliament that there were no Australians involved in interrogation of Iraqi prisoners. That is patently untrue as has been revealed by former Defence Intellegence Organisation specialist Rod Barton (he personally conducted interrogations).
His attempt to tell the truth (which isn't all that remarkable when you get down to it) has been met with stonewalling from the Department of Defence. All the while, Senator Hill has been dodging the issue and sweeping it under the carpet. Frankly, this is a reiteration of the Tampa incident and should be exposed for what it is... government white lies to manipulate the Australian public.
Kim Beazley (opposition leader) is a man of great heart but now is the time for some backbone.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Hill lied about Iraq interrogations: expert (excerpt) By Tom Allard February 14, 2005
...The Defence Minister, Robert Hill, lied to Parliament when he said no Australians had interrogated Iraqi prisoners, an Australian biological weapons expert says.
Rod Barton, a former Defence Intelligence Organisation specialist, has also painted a picture of a servile Australian, US and British military hierarchy, prepared to suppress the truth to protect their political masters.
Mr Barton says he interrogated prisoners at Camp Cropper, near Baghdad airport, when contracted to work for the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) and told the Defence Department when he returned in March last year.
Yet two months later, Senator Hill told Parliament: "Defence has thoroughly reviewed the information and has confirmed the key facts in this issue. Australia did not interrogate prisoners."
That statement was made to correct earlier false remarks by Senator Hill to the Senate about when Australians became aware of the prisoner abuse scandal, exposed in a series of Herald reports.
But Mr Barton says Senator Hill followed a falsehood with more lies.
"I immediately phoned up the department and reported that I was annoyed," Mr Barton said.
He said the Defence Department responded by saying he had conducted "interviews", not interrogations.
"Someone was brought to me in an orange jumpsuit with a guard with a gun standing behind him," Mr Barton said. "I believe it was an interrogation. The Iraqis regarded it as an interrogation," he said.
Moreover, he says he has since learnt that other Australians were involved in interrogations in Iraq...
Sunday, February 13, 2005
Multidrug resistant HIV strain identified
Doctors in New York have recently identified a previously unknown strain of HIV that is resistant to three of the four commonly used antiviral agents. It was discovered in a man who developed AIDS much quicker than what would have been expected.
In a way, this development was expected sooner or later though I'm sure it is no comfort to public health officials that it has emerged.
From: BBC News
Drug-resistant HIV strain found (excerpt)
...Health officials in New York say they have found a new strain of highly drug-resistant HIV in a city resident.
The resident, a man in his mid-40s who had unprotected sex with men for years, is thought to have developed Aids much faster than usual after infection.
The strain - known as 3-DCR HIV - has not been detected anywhere in the world and is "difficult or impossible to treat", according to health experts...
...He is thought have been infected quite recently, and developed Aids between two and 20 months after infection. Progression to Aids usually takes about 10 years.
The strain was found to be resistant to three out of the four commonest anti-retroviral drugs.
Ronald Valdiserri, director of the HIV/Aids programme at the US Centers for Disease Control, no similar case had been found anywhere in the world.
"What's unique about this is the combination of multiple drug resistance and a rapid course," he told the New York Times newspaper. "To folks in the public health community, that is a particularly dangerous combination..."
In a way, this development was expected sooner or later though I'm sure it is no comfort to public health officials that it has emerged.
From: BBC News
Drug-resistant HIV strain found (excerpt)
...Health officials in New York say they have found a new strain of highly drug-resistant HIV in a city resident.
The resident, a man in his mid-40s who had unprotected sex with men for years, is thought to have developed Aids much faster than usual after infection.
The strain - known as 3-DCR HIV - has not been detected anywhere in the world and is "difficult or impossible to treat", according to health experts...
...He is thought have been infected quite recently, and developed Aids between two and 20 months after infection. Progression to Aids usually takes about 10 years.
The strain was found to be resistant to three out of the four commonest anti-retroviral drugs.
Ronald Valdiserri, director of the HIV/Aids programme at the US Centers for Disease Control, no similar case had been found anywhere in the world.
"What's unique about this is the combination of multiple drug resistance and a rapid course," he told the New York Times newspaper. "To folks in the public health community, that is a particularly dangerous combination..."
Thursday, February 10, 2005
rTMS for depression
The Sydney Morning Herald has an interesting report of a (relatively) new technology/modality in treating depression. rTMS is "repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation" and uses magnetic fields to stimulate parts of the brain -- often part of the frontal lobe.
The same technology (transcranial magnetic stimulation) is also used in a number of neurological response tests (e.g., timing how long a signal takes to travel from the brain to the peripheries).
For those who don't know, the most effective form of threpy for major depression is ECT or electroconvulsive therapy. Unlike public perception, it is not barbaric at all and is quite safe. However, the patient still needs to be sedated and have a muscle relaxant given by an anaethetist and it isn't a "walk in/walk out" sort of therapy. Some people may need "maintenance" ECT (e.g., once a week).
It will be interesting how this technology eventually pans out. If it does require once a day treatment, it will be relatively inconvenient to most people unless a portable/home version is available...
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Magnets point the way (excerpt)
February 10, 2005
...For people like Teresa and Baptiste - whose depression has not remitted after trying several anti-depressants - electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is often proposed as the next step. But late last year, both women took part in an alternative treatment being trialled at the Black Dog Institute, based at the Prince of Wales Hospital.
Known as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), the treatment stimulates the brain using strong magnetic fields, and has been showing success in people who are resistant to anti-depressant medication or who can't tolerate medication.
Trial leader Dr Colleen Loo, a research psychiatrist with the Black Dog Institute and senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales, say the treatment is non-invasive and has fewer cognitive side effects than ECT, which would give it a more acceptable public image...
...The treatment is delivered via a simple butterfly-shaped coil held to the patient's head while magnetic pulses are directed for about 30 minutes to the left frontal lobe of the brain, which is thought to be underactive in those who suffer depression.
Loo says the patients suffer no memory loss from the therapy, which is a troublesome side effect of ECT...
"...After two weeks, it is hard to see differences, but other studies worldwide have shown rTMS to be more effective than a placebo," she says. "Following the two-week trial, everyone has the chance to receive active rTMS for up to six weeks, at no cost. Our data show that at least half of participants are getting better after six weeks of rTMS."
Not everybody responds to the treatment.
"Studies show that people who have a depression that is reactive to stress or people with a psychotic depression [depression accompanied by delusions, hallucinations] are less likely to do well with rTMS. But people who have a chemical kind of depression tend to be more responsive..."
The same technology (transcranial magnetic stimulation) is also used in a number of neurological response tests (e.g., timing how long a signal takes to travel from the brain to the peripheries).
For those who don't know, the most effective form of threpy for major depression is ECT or electroconvulsive therapy. Unlike public perception, it is not barbaric at all and is quite safe. However, the patient still needs to be sedated and have a muscle relaxant given by an anaethetist and it isn't a "walk in/walk out" sort of therapy. Some people may need "maintenance" ECT (e.g., once a week).
It will be interesting how this technology eventually pans out. If it does require once a day treatment, it will be relatively inconvenient to most people unless a portable/home version is available...
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Magnets point the way (excerpt)
February 10, 2005
...For people like Teresa and Baptiste - whose depression has not remitted after trying several anti-depressants - electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is often proposed as the next step. But late last year, both women took part in an alternative treatment being trialled at the Black Dog Institute, based at the Prince of Wales Hospital.
Known as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), the treatment stimulates the brain using strong magnetic fields, and has been showing success in people who are resistant to anti-depressant medication or who can't tolerate medication.
Trial leader Dr Colleen Loo, a research psychiatrist with the Black Dog Institute and senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales, say the treatment is non-invasive and has fewer cognitive side effects than ECT, which would give it a more acceptable public image...
...The treatment is delivered via a simple butterfly-shaped coil held to the patient's head while magnetic pulses are directed for about 30 minutes to the left frontal lobe of the brain, which is thought to be underactive in those who suffer depression.
Loo says the patients suffer no memory loss from the therapy, which is a troublesome side effect of ECT...
"...After two weeks, it is hard to see differences, but other studies worldwide have shown rTMS to be more effective than a placebo," she says. "Following the two-week trial, everyone has the chance to receive active rTMS for up to six weeks, at no cost. Our data show that at least half of participants are getting better after six weeks of rTMS."
Not everybody responds to the treatment.
"Studies show that people who have a depression that is reactive to stress or people with a psychotic depression [depression accompanied by delusions, hallucinations] are less likely to do well with rTMS. But people who have a chemical kind of depression tend to be more responsive..."
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Clinical Nurse Consultants score well with computer aids
Clinical Nurse Consultants (CNCs) are very useful people to have around. As a hospital resident, often I just wish that the more experienced nurses would just treat some of the simpler problems they see rather than necessarily asking me.
The above trial showed that CNCs with a computerised clinical aid scored relatively well againts general practitioners.
However, that above trial probably shows something that should alarm quite a few people. CNCs without the computerised aid did poorly versus a doctor without one. And realistically, what tends to happen over time is that you end up using the computer for things that you're not quite sure of rather than for every single case. Inevitably, it means you will slip being the times on current management or possibly even use the wrong management.
The difference between doctors and nurses is that doctors have been trained to have a thorough knowledge of physiology and pathology primarily, and generally we have a much better idea about pharmacology as well. Meaning, even if we're wrong, we're not TOO wrong and we are less likely to miss something serious.
Still CNCs in specific positions (e.g., nurse run primary care clinics with a tie-line to a GP or Emergency Department) would be great for the health system.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Doctors and nurses tie in skills exam (excerpt)
By Ruth Pollard
February 7, 2005
...In a computer laboratory, 26 hospital-based doctors, 18 family practitioners and 31 clinical nurse consultants sat an exam to test their knowledge of basic clinical practice, aided by a newly developed search engine.
The result: no difference in the scores between the doctors and nurses - adding weight to calls for proper recognition of nurses' work and opening a new frontier of computer-generated clinical guidance.
Faced with eight common scenarios, such as treatment for "glue ear" in young children or the best device to use for asthma medication, the entire group were 21 per cent better at answering questions when they used the search engine, said the study's lead author, Enrico Coiera, from the University of NSW's Centre for Health Informatics.
"The doctors did do better on those questions unaided," Professor Coiera said. "Then we gave them [all participants] access to a search engine, and the difference we saw in the performance between doctors and nurses disappeared."
Without the search engine, GPs were correct 41 per cent of the time, hospital doctors 35 per cent and clinical nurse consultants 17 per cent.
"It [the search engine] allows nurses to perform better than they could otherwise, and they will be increasingly put in situations in the future where they will be making more high-level clinical decisions," Professor Coiera said. "This is one way of supporting that..."
The above trial showed that CNCs with a computerised clinical aid scored relatively well againts general practitioners.
However, that above trial probably shows something that should alarm quite a few people. CNCs without the computerised aid did poorly versus a doctor without one. And realistically, what tends to happen over time is that you end up using the computer for things that you're not quite sure of rather than for every single case. Inevitably, it means you will slip being the times on current management or possibly even use the wrong management.
"Without the search engine, GPs were correct 41 per cent of the time, hospital doctors 35 per cent and clinical nurse consultants 17 per cent."
The difference between doctors and nurses is that doctors have been trained to have a thorough knowledge of physiology and pathology primarily, and generally we have a much better idea about pharmacology as well. Meaning, even if we're wrong, we're not TOO wrong and we are less likely to miss something serious.
Still CNCs in specific positions (e.g., nurse run primary care clinics with a tie-line to a GP or Emergency Department) would be great for the health system.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Doctors and nurses tie in skills exam (excerpt)
By Ruth Pollard
February 7, 2005
...In a computer laboratory, 26 hospital-based doctors, 18 family practitioners and 31 clinical nurse consultants sat an exam to test their knowledge of basic clinical practice, aided by a newly developed search engine.
The result: no difference in the scores between the doctors and nurses - adding weight to calls for proper recognition of nurses' work and opening a new frontier of computer-generated clinical guidance.
Faced with eight common scenarios, such as treatment for "glue ear" in young children or the best device to use for asthma medication, the entire group were 21 per cent better at answering questions when they used the search engine, said the study's lead author, Enrico Coiera, from the University of NSW's Centre for Health Informatics.
"The doctors did do better on those questions unaided," Professor Coiera said. "Then we gave them [all participants] access to a search engine, and the difference we saw in the performance between doctors and nurses disappeared."
Without the search engine, GPs were correct 41 per cent of the time, hospital doctors 35 per cent and clinical nurse consultants 17 per cent.
"It [the search engine] allows nurses to perform better than they could otherwise, and they will be increasingly put in situations in the future where they will be making more high-level clinical decisions," Professor Coiera said. "This is one way of supporting that..."
Bizarre - Man cuts off own testicles
Though this man has a mental illness for sure, I'm sure that no one is going to take his word at face value again!
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Rugby fan 'cuts off testicles' to celebrate win February 8, 2005 - 1:35PM
A Welsh rugby fan has reportedly cut off his own testicles to celebrate Wales beating England at rugby.
Geoff Huish, 26, was so convinced England would win Saturday's match he told fellow drinkers at a social club, "If Wales win I'll cut my balls off", the Daily Mirror reported today.
Friends at the club in Caerphilly, south Wales, thought he was joking.
But after the game Huish went home, severed his testicles with a knife, and walked 200 metres back to the bar with the testicles to show the shocked drinkers what he had done.
Huish was taken to hospital where he remained in a seriously ill condition, the paper said. Police told the paper he had a history of mental problems.
Wales's 11-9 victory over England at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff was their first home win in 12 years.
Reuters
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Rugby fan 'cuts off testicles' to celebrate win February 8, 2005 - 1:35PM
A Welsh rugby fan has reportedly cut off his own testicles to celebrate Wales beating England at rugby.
Geoff Huish, 26, was so convinced England would win Saturday's match he told fellow drinkers at a social club, "If Wales win I'll cut my balls off", the Daily Mirror reported today.
Friends at the club in Caerphilly, south Wales, thought he was joking.
But after the game Huish went home, severed his testicles with a knife, and walked 200 metres back to the bar with the testicles to show the shocked drinkers what he had done.
Huish was taken to hospital where he remained in a seriously ill condition, the paper said. Police told the paper he had a history of mental problems.
Wales's 11-9 victory over England at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff was their first home win in 12 years.
Reuters
Sunday, February 06, 2005
Mentally ill woman locked up for 2 years as "illegal immigrant"
One of the most amazing stories has been revealed in the news recently. Amazing that it could ever have happened as we like to believe that we live in a fair and civil society.
Cornelia Rau, a 39 year old woman of German descent is a permanent resident and has lived in Australia since she was a baby went missing about 2 years ago. She had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia at that time.
We now know what has happened to her. The manifestation of her illness includes chronic psychosis with delusions and hallucinations and when she was "found", she spoke in German and insisted that her name was Anna Schmidt.
Somehow, despite being listed in the NSW Missing Person's Unit, she was transferred to immigration officials who somehow deemed her an illegal immigrant.
She been kept in what appears to have been dismal conditions at the Baxter Detention Centre ever since with limited if no psychiatric care.
This constitutes gross negligence in the Government's duty of care to this individual. I hope that Australia's inhumane treatment to refugees and "illegal immigrants" get shaken up from this.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
PM orders inquiry into mentally ill woman's detention (excerpt)
February 6, 2005 - 7:38PM
...The Federal Government today ordered an inquiry into how a mentally ill Australian woman came to be locked up at an immigration detention centre, despite being listed as missing.
Prime Minister John Howard today said an inquiry would be held into the "very regrettable incident", amid claims the woman was subjected to degrading treatment at the Baxter immigration detention centre in South Australia.
Cornelia Rau, a 39-year-old permanent resident who came to Australia when she was a baby, was released from the centre on Friday.
She had spent six months in a Queensland jail before being sent to Baxter, where she spent four months after telling authorities she was a German woman named Anna Schmidt.
That was despite the former Qantas flight attendant being listed as missing in August last year...
...The family only discovered Ms Rau was being held at Baxter after reading a media report on Thursday about a mystery German-speaking woman being held there.
They contacted the NSW Missing Persons Unit which made contact with officials at Baxter who emailed a photograph of the woman later identified as Cornelia, Ms Rau said.
The family had had no contact with immigration authorities, she said.
Refugee advocates allege Ms Rau was locked in solitary confinement for up to 20 hours a day while at Baxter.
Former Baxter detainee Eric Upton, who occupied a cell adjacent to Ms Rau's, today said her treatment was degrading and humiliating, including being forced to shower without a curtain.
"I'd see guards looking through her door. It's just not right," he told Channel Nine.
He said he tried to raise his concerns about her treatment but was told it was a matter for immigration.
"I was voicing my opinion to the officers, you know, 'What's going on here, you know this is bizarre, it shouldn't ben happening.' They just shrugged their shoulders and said 'Oh it's not up to us, it's up to immigration...' "
Cornelia Rau, a 39 year old woman of German descent is a permanent resident and has lived in Australia since she was a baby went missing about 2 years ago. She had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia at that time.
We now know what has happened to her. The manifestation of her illness includes chronic psychosis with delusions and hallucinations and when she was "found", she spoke in German and insisted that her name was Anna Schmidt.
Somehow, despite being listed in the NSW Missing Person's Unit, she was transferred to immigration officials who somehow deemed her an illegal immigrant.
She been kept in what appears to have been dismal conditions at the Baxter Detention Centre ever since with limited if no psychiatric care.
This constitutes gross negligence in the Government's duty of care to this individual. I hope that Australia's inhumane treatment to refugees and "illegal immigrants" get shaken up from this.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
PM orders inquiry into mentally ill woman's detention (excerpt)
February 6, 2005 - 7:38PM
...The Federal Government today ordered an inquiry into how a mentally ill Australian woman came to be locked up at an immigration detention centre, despite being listed as missing.
Prime Minister John Howard today said an inquiry would be held into the "very regrettable incident", amid claims the woman was subjected to degrading treatment at the Baxter immigration detention centre in South Australia.
Cornelia Rau, a 39-year-old permanent resident who came to Australia when she was a baby, was released from the centre on Friday.
She had spent six months in a Queensland jail before being sent to Baxter, where she spent four months after telling authorities she was a German woman named Anna Schmidt.
That was despite the former Qantas flight attendant being listed as missing in August last year...
...The family only discovered Ms Rau was being held at Baxter after reading a media report on Thursday about a mystery German-speaking woman being held there.
They contacted the NSW Missing Persons Unit which made contact with officials at Baxter who emailed a photograph of the woman later identified as Cornelia, Ms Rau said.
The family had had no contact with immigration authorities, she said.
Refugee advocates allege Ms Rau was locked in solitary confinement for up to 20 hours a day while at Baxter.
Former Baxter detainee Eric Upton, who occupied a cell adjacent to Ms Rau's, today said her treatment was degrading and humiliating, including being forced to shower without a curtain.
"I'd see guards looking through her door. It's just not right," he told Channel Nine.
He said he tried to raise his concerns about her treatment but was told it was a matter for immigration.
"I was voicing my opinion to the officers, you know, 'What's going on here, you know this is bizarre, it shouldn't ben happening.' They just shrugged their shoulders and said 'Oh it's not up to us, it's up to immigration...' "
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Increased risk of stroke when stopping aspirin
Aspirin is commonly used for secondary prevention of stroke. However, as many people know, "blood thinning" agents like aspirin, warfarin and anti-inflammatory agents are usually stopped for about a week before an operation, for for minor surgery.
Researchers have now quantified that patients stopping aspirin increase their risk of another stroke 3 fold in a month. Perhaps cessation of aspirin in these patients before a minor operation is not the best idea.
From: BBC News
Stroke warning on aspirin therapy (excerpt)
...Stroke survivors who stop taking their daily prescription of aspirin triple the risk of another stroke within a month, research suggests.
Aspirin has been shown to cut the risk of recurrent stroke by about 25%.
But Swiss research suggests the protective effect is rapidly lost when aspirin is no longer taken.
If confirmed, the findings may prompt a rethink of the current advice that patients stop taking aspirin in the days before undergoing minor surgery...
...The Swiss researchers focused on 309 patients who had a stroke or a mini-stroke - known as a transient ischemic attack (TIA) - and later went on to suffer a further episode. All of this group had at least inititally been put on long-term aspirin therapy.
The researchers said they found that in 13 cases the patients had stopped taking their aspirin in the four weeks leading up to their latest stroke.
To find out how significant this was, the researchers found another group of 309 stroke patients, who had also been prescribed aspirin but this time had not suffered a recurrent stroke.
In this group, just four patients admitted they had stopped taking their pills during the four weeks surveyed.
From this the researchers, who presented their findings at a conference of the American Stroke Association, calculated that stopping aspirin therapy increased the short term risk of a recurrent stroke by more than three times...
...Co-author of the study and director of the acute stroke unit at Lausanne University Dr Patrik Michel told the BBC News website that aspirin reduced the risk of heart problems or stroke by inhibiting enzymes that make tiny particles in the blood called platelets less sticky.
But he said the study suggested that stopping aspirin therapy increased the risk of a new stroke above what could be expected for a patient who had never taken aspirin at all - at least for a week or two after having stopped it.
"The findings strongly suggest there is a rebound effect - that blood gets stickier when you stop taking aspirin than it would have been if you had never taken it in the first place," he said...
Researchers have now quantified that patients stopping aspirin increase their risk of another stroke 3 fold in a month. Perhaps cessation of aspirin in these patients before a minor operation is not the best idea.
From: BBC News
Stroke warning on aspirin therapy (excerpt)
...Stroke survivors who stop taking their daily prescription of aspirin triple the risk of another stroke within a month, research suggests.
Aspirin has been shown to cut the risk of recurrent stroke by about 25%.
But Swiss research suggests the protective effect is rapidly lost when aspirin is no longer taken.
If confirmed, the findings may prompt a rethink of the current advice that patients stop taking aspirin in the days before undergoing minor surgery...
...The Swiss researchers focused on 309 patients who had a stroke or a mini-stroke - known as a transient ischemic attack (TIA) - and later went on to suffer a further episode. All of this group had at least inititally been put on long-term aspirin therapy.
The researchers said they found that in 13 cases the patients had stopped taking their aspirin in the four weeks leading up to their latest stroke.
To find out how significant this was, the researchers found another group of 309 stroke patients, who had also been prescribed aspirin but this time had not suffered a recurrent stroke.
In this group, just four patients admitted they had stopped taking their pills during the four weeks surveyed.
From this the researchers, who presented their findings at a conference of the American Stroke Association, calculated that stopping aspirin therapy increased the short term risk of a recurrent stroke by more than three times...
...Co-author of the study and director of the acute stroke unit at Lausanne University Dr Patrik Michel told the BBC News website that aspirin reduced the risk of heart problems or stroke by inhibiting enzymes that make tiny particles in the blood called platelets less sticky.
But he said the study suggested that stopping aspirin therapy increased the risk of a new stroke above what could be expected for a patient who had never taken aspirin at all - at least for a week or two after having stopped it.
"The findings strongly suggest there is a rebound effect - that blood gets stickier when you stop taking aspirin than it would have been if you had never taken it in the first place," he said...
Friday, February 04, 2005
Alcohol and the burden of disease
Recently published in the Lancet, researchers found the 4% of the global burden of disease was attributable to alcohol. This is compared to 4.1% for tobacco and 4.4% for high blood pressure.
Though this is not particularly surprising, it will not be an easy thing to reverse considering the relatively liberatarian attitude many people have towards alcohol.
From: BBC News.
Though this is not particularly surprising, it will not be an easy thing to reverse considering the relatively liberatarian attitude many people have towards alcohol.
From: BBC News.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
The views of an apologist
In an opinion piece written in the Sydney Morning Herald, Ted Lapkin attempts to argue that the reason that Mamdouh Habib was released was that the US was more concerned about the safety of its intellegence sources. A quotation from the article,
Actually, as detailed later in the article, Mr Lapkin has no access to intellegence information at all so the "far more likely" statement is more a reflection of what he chooses to believe rather than what is supported by the facts. Furthermore, although Mr Lapkin makes all very relevent points, it is his conclusion that betrays his lack of humanity,
It is unknown whether Mr Habib was a sympathesier or even active participant in various "terrorist" organisations. That, however, is beside the point. If he is a criminal, then he should be charged. He should be given his due legal process and be at least afforded the human rights he is legally entitled (not to mention our moral obligation). The KNOWN wrongs (e.g., detention without charge, denial of due process, denial of rights afforded by the Geneva Convention) committed against Mr Habib cannot be condoned because he may be a "bad man". These "known" wrongs are probably only the tip of the iceberg. Somehow I feel that the allegations of torture are more than likely to be true to some extent.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Hold the apology - freedom is not proof of Habib's innocence
February 1, 2005
...Three years after his arrest in Pakistan, Mamdouh Habib was released from detention at Guantanamo Bay. Habib's supporters are loudly declaring that his discharge constitutes conclusive proof of his innocence and are demanding an apology, and compensation into the bargain.
Yet not only are Australian and American officials unrepentant about Habib's incarceration, they clearly harbour continuing suspicions about his allegiance to al-Qaeda. So why did the US Government decline to prosecute Habib, despite the obvious belief in his terrorist connections?
It is conceivable that the US simply lacked sufficient evidence to bring a successful criminal case in this matter. But it is far more likely that the information implicating Habib comes from classified sources that the US is loath to compromise. Benjamin Franklin once remarked that three men could keep a secret if two of them were dead. Franklin's quip illustrates the challenge of protecting information sources that faces every intelligence agency.
The prospect that sensitive material may be divulged grows with each person who is admitted to the secret. The only way to minimise the risk of leakage is through "compartmentalisation", a term that describes the practice of restricting access on a "need to know" basis. ASIO, the CIA and Britain's MI5 rigorously apply this principle to their personnel, even though they have all been granted security clearances.
Yet the mandate for intelligence source protection contradicts the formulas that our justice system employs to ensure fairness and due process. The legally sacrosanct rule of evidentiary discovery obliges each party in a judicial proceeding to disclose every bit of information that might have a bearing on the case. Thus, if the US Government wished to prosecute Habib, it would be forced to divulge all relevant material, no matter how sensitive its source.
Signal intercepts introduced into evidence would provide al-Qaeda with priceless information about how America eavesdrops on terrorist communications networks. Evidence based on satellite imagery would reveal the precise capabilities of America's space-borne cameras. And courtroom testimony by deep-cover agents would provide telltale hints that might bring about the exposure of entire intelligence networks.
While trial by military commission would provide a more secure framework than a conventional civilian court, access to the proceedings would still be widely available. And any request by the prosecution for a public interest exemption would have to be argued before a judge in the presence of Habib's lawyers. This exposure would make it difficult to ensure the preservation of classified intelligence data that is vital to the war against al-Qaeda.
Faced with a choice between prosecuting Habib and burning intelligence sources that might prevent future terrorist attacks, government lawyers would forgo their most potent evidence. US authorities could very well have a convincing case that is simply too sensitive to reveal in court. And if the criminal prosecution of Habib would pose an intolerable threat to national security, then it is little wonder that the Americans chose to cut him loose rather than charge him.
I have no access to any classified intelligence material relating to Habib. But neither do Habib's family, his legal team and his supporters. And while much is not known, there is enough evidence to justify the determination that Habib should remain a "person of national security interest" to ASIO.
In fact, Habib has been a constant feature on the ASIO radar screen for most of the past decade. Habib first attracted the attention of intelligence officials over his outspoken support for Omar Abdul Rahman, the "blind sheik" who was imprisoned for his role in the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing. During the late 1990s Habib became known in Sydney's Muslim community as a recruiter for the "jihad" holy war movement in Chechnya and other war zones.
And Habib practised what he preached. In March 2000, he visited Afghanistan. According to ABC television's Four Corners program, Australian intelligence officials believe Habib may have trained with the al-Qaeda-affiliated Lashkar-e-Toiba terrorist group during his Afghan sojourn.
Thus Habib is hardly the poster boy for outraged innocence that his lawyers would have us believe. He played at jihad and he paid the price for his actions with his incarceration by American authorities. Habib's emancipation from Guantanamo by no means constitutes proof of his virtue.
Ted Lapkin is associate editor of The Review, published by the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council.
"It is conceivable that the US simply lacked sufficient evidence to bring a successful criminal case in this matter. But it is far more likely that the information implicating Habib comes from classified sources that the US is loath to compromise."
Actually, as detailed later in the article, Mr Lapkin has no access to intellegence information at all so the "far more likely" statement is more a reflection of what he chooses to believe rather than what is supported by the facts. Furthermore, although Mr Lapkin makes all very relevent points, it is his conclusion that betrays his lack of humanity,
"He [Habib] played at jihad and he paid the price for his actions with his incarceration by American authorities. Habib's emancipation from Guantanamo by no means constitutes proof of his virtue."
It is unknown whether Mr Habib was a sympathesier or even active participant in various "terrorist" organisations. That, however, is beside the point. If he is a criminal, then he should be charged. He should be given his due legal process and be at least afforded the human rights he is legally entitled (not to mention our moral obligation). The KNOWN wrongs (e.g., detention without charge, denial of due process, denial of rights afforded by the Geneva Convention) committed against Mr Habib cannot be condoned because he may be a "bad man". These "known" wrongs are probably only the tip of the iceberg. Somehow I feel that the allegations of torture are more than likely to be true to some extent.
From: The Sydney Morning Herald
Hold the apology - freedom is not proof of Habib's innocence
February 1, 2005
...Three years after his arrest in Pakistan, Mamdouh Habib was released from detention at Guantanamo Bay. Habib's supporters are loudly declaring that his discharge constitutes conclusive proof of his innocence and are demanding an apology, and compensation into the bargain.
Yet not only are Australian and American officials unrepentant about Habib's incarceration, they clearly harbour continuing suspicions about his allegiance to al-Qaeda. So why did the US Government decline to prosecute Habib, despite the obvious belief in his terrorist connections?
It is conceivable that the US simply lacked sufficient evidence to bring a successful criminal case in this matter. But it is far more likely that the information implicating Habib comes from classified sources that the US is loath to compromise. Benjamin Franklin once remarked that three men could keep a secret if two of them were dead. Franklin's quip illustrates the challenge of protecting information sources that faces every intelligence agency.
The prospect that sensitive material may be divulged grows with each person who is admitted to the secret. The only way to minimise the risk of leakage is through "compartmentalisation", a term that describes the practice of restricting access on a "need to know" basis. ASIO, the CIA and Britain's MI5 rigorously apply this principle to their personnel, even though they have all been granted security clearances.
Yet the mandate for intelligence source protection contradicts the formulas that our justice system employs to ensure fairness and due process. The legally sacrosanct rule of evidentiary discovery obliges each party in a judicial proceeding to disclose every bit of information that might have a bearing on the case. Thus, if the US Government wished to prosecute Habib, it would be forced to divulge all relevant material, no matter how sensitive its source.
Signal intercepts introduced into evidence would provide al-Qaeda with priceless information about how America eavesdrops on terrorist communications networks. Evidence based on satellite imagery would reveal the precise capabilities of America's space-borne cameras. And courtroom testimony by deep-cover agents would provide telltale hints that might bring about the exposure of entire intelligence networks.
While trial by military commission would provide a more secure framework than a conventional civilian court, access to the proceedings would still be widely available. And any request by the prosecution for a public interest exemption would have to be argued before a judge in the presence of Habib's lawyers. This exposure would make it difficult to ensure the preservation of classified intelligence data that is vital to the war against al-Qaeda.
Faced with a choice between prosecuting Habib and burning intelligence sources that might prevent future terrorist attacks, government lawyers would forgo their most potent evidence. US authorities could very well have a convincing case that is simply too sensitive to reveal in court. And if the criminal prosecution of Habib would pose an intolerable threat to national security, then it is little wonder that the Americans chose to cut him loose rather than charge him.
I have no access to any classified intelligence material relating to Habib. But neither do Habib's family, his legal team and his supporters. And while much is not known, there is enough evidence to justify the determination that Habib should remain a "person of national security interest" to ASIO.
In fact, Habib has been a constant feature on the ASIO radar screen for most of the past decade. Habib first attracted the attention of intelligence officials over his outspoken support for Omar Abdul Rahman, the "blind sheik" who was imprisoned for his role in the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing. During the late 1990s Habib became known in Sydney's Muslim community as a recruiter for the "jihad" holy war movement in Chechnya and other war zones.
And Habib practised what he preached. In March 2000, he visited Afghanistan. According to ABC television's Four Corners program, Australian intelligence officials believe Habib may have trained with the al-Qaeda-affiliated Lashkar-e-Toiba terrorist group during his Afghan sojourn.
Thus Habib is hardly the poster boy for outraged innocence that his lawyers would have us believe. He played at jihad and he paid the price for his actions with his incarceration by American authorities. Habib's emancipation from Guantanamo by no means constitutes proof of his virtue.
Ted Lapkin is associate editor of The Review, published by the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council.
Guantanamo Bay tribunals ruled unconstitutional
A US federal judge had recently ruled that some of the military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay were unconstitutional and that detainees were not accorded due process of law.
As I have reported before, thank goodness there is still sanity in the US judicial process. I hope this issue doesn't get forgotten and swept aside as what the US government has done is contrary to the very principles and moral responsibilities of a Western civil society. As per Judge Green:
From: BBC News
Judge backs Guantanamo challenge (excerpt)
...A US federal judge in Washington has ruled that special military tribunals being used to try hundreds of detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba are illegal.
Judge Joyce Hens Green said the tribunals denied the detainees their basic rights under the US constitution.
Her ruling is a blow to the Bush administration, which argues the inmates have no constitutional rights...
...Judge Green said the tribunals in 11 cases she had examined were unconstitutional, and that the detainees were not accorded due process of law.
She noted the widespread allegations that detainees were abused during interrogations and said this cast doubt over any confession made under such circumstances.
The war on terror "cannot negate the existence of the most basic fundamental rights for which the people of this country have fought and died for well over 200 years," she wrote...
...Only two weeks ago, Judge Richard Leon dismissed a lawsuit filed by seven detainees. He backed the view that foreign nationals captured and detained outside the US had no recognisable constitutional rights.
He said it was up to the US Congress, not the courts, to decide the conditions of imprisonment.
Both lawsuits followed a ruling by the US Supreme Court last June that inmates did have the right to challenge their detention...
As I have reported before, thank goodness there is still sanity in the US judicial process. I hope this issue doesn't get forgotten and swept aside as what the US government has done is contrary to the very principles and moral responsibilities of a Western civil society. As per Judge Green:
The war on terror "cannot negate the existence of the most basic fundamental rights for which the people of this country have fought and died for well over 200 years"
From: BBC News
Judge backs Guantanamo challenge (excerpt)
...A US federal judge in Washington has ruled that special military tribunals being used to try hundreds of detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba are illegal.
Judge Joyce Hens Green said the tribunals denied the detainees their basic rights under the US constitution.
Her ruling is a blow to the Bush administration, which argues the inmates have no constitutional rights...
...Judge Green said the tribunals in 11 cases she had examined were unconstitutional, and that the detainees were not accorded due process of law.
She noted the widespread allegations that detainees were abused during interrogations and said this cast doubt over any confession made under such circumstances.
The war on terror "cannot negate the existence of the most basic fundamental rights for which the people of this country have fought and died for well over 200 years," she wrote...
...Only two weeks ago, Judge Richard Leon dismissed a lawsuit filed by seven detainees. He backed the view that foreign nationals captured and detained outside the US had no recognisable constitutional rights.
He said it was up to the US Congress, not the courts, to decide the conditions of imprisonment.
Both lawsuits followed a ruling by the US Supreme Court last June that inmates did have the right to challenge their detention...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
